The High Court · 2025

Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High court may be pleased to issue an order or orders writ or writs or directions more particularly in the nature of writ of mandamus declaring the action of the Respondent No.2 to 6 in non-considering the claim of the petitioner and non-initiating the release of Rythu Bhima to the Petitioner on the death of her husband who died on 31-08-2024 by having Rythu Bhima Insurance No.1113741 is illegal, arbitrary and violative of Article 14 and 21 of constitution of lndia and also violative of the provrsions of lndian succession Act which will haver prominence over the Nomination Rules of lnsurance Act and consequenfly dire:)t the respondent No.2 to 5 to pay the Rythu Bheem scheme amount to be cred t,rd in the Bank Account No.41378401441 with CtF No 91062 122011, State :Jank of tndia, ADB Nagarkurnool Branch with Branch code No. 5875-held rrr the name of petitioner alternatively to satisfy the provisions of the Insurance Lct and in harmonious reading of the provisions of the lndian succession Act lre Rythu Bhima claim amount may be transferred to the credit of the nominee :'th Respondent herein who in turn she will transfer the claim amount to the accc unt of the petitioner in the interest of justice Counsel for the Petitioner : SRt M VENKANNA Counsel for the Respondent Nos..1,2 4 & 5: Gp FOR AGtt CULTURE Counsel for the Respondent No.3: Gp FOR HOME Counsel for the Respondent No.6: SMT. K. VIJAYA SAN'- .ll Counsel for the Respondent No. 7: --- The Court made the following: ORDER n \ THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE T. MADHAVI DEVI WRIT PETITION No.23712 of 2025 OR.DER This Writ Petition is f,rled seeking a Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of respondents No'2 to 6 in not considering the claim of the petitioner for release of the Ryhu Bhima amount on the death of her husband, rvho died on 3't.08-2024, as illegal and arbitrary and violative of the provisions of the Hindu Succession Act, and consequently to direct respondent No.2 to 5 to pay the Rythu Bhima Scheme amount to the petitioner's bank account No.41378401441, and to pass such other order or orders'

2. Brief [acts leading to the filing of the present Writ Petition are that the Govemment of Telangana introduced the Rythu Bhima Scheme in the year 2018. 'lhe eligibility criteria for enrollment under the scheme are that the farmer should be between 18 to 59 years of age as on 1 5.08.20 t 8 and the sum assured is Rs'5,00,000/-' It is stated that the premium is paid by the Govemment' As per the information submitted by the Commissioner, Agriculture and Market Department, the petitioner's husband was unmarried at the \ 2 TMDJ r,\t 23712,2025 ttme of enrollment as a member of the scheme an,i he nominated his elder sister, i.e., respondent No.7 lrt r.:rn, as the nominee,/beneficiary. Subsequently, he got marricd rn 0 i . 12.20 1 9 and died on 31.08.2024, leaving behind his wil.e (he peririoner) and two minor male children aged one and four ycall respectlvely, at the time of his death. However, he did not chanu.: the namc of the nominee during his lifetime and on that gror r d, the Rythu Bhima amount has not being disbursed to the pcri r)ner. Though she is legal heir and successor of the properties lctt rchind by her late husband, the respondent authorities have declir,r d to disburse the claim amount to the petitioner on the ground thii she was not being nominated by her husband.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner, while -,.iterating the submissions made in the writ affidavit, placed rclir rce upon the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in he case of SmL Sarhati Devi and another v. SmL Usha Devit. tn support of his contention that a nominee is merely a recipienr and that the benefit should be passed on to the actual legal heirs ,r successors ' tes: atR lscy :<o 3 TMDJ w,23712 2025 of the deceased. Therefore, he seeks a direction to the respondents to disburse the Rythu Bhima amount to the petitioner.

4. In spite of service ofnotice, there is no appearance on behalf of respondent No.7.

5. Respondent No.4 and respondent No.6 hled counter afhdavits. Both the counter affidavits are to the effect that the amount can be disbursed only to the nominee.

6. Having regard to the rival contentions and the material on record, this Court finds that the deceased farmer was admittedly unmarried at the time of entering into the scheme in the year 2018 and he got married in the year 2019 and died in the year 2024 leaving behind his wife and two children. The respondents in their counter affidavit have not stated that there is a procedure for change of nomination from year to year or that the deceased farmer has not chosen to change the nomination during his lifetime. It appears that the nomination made at the time of enrollment continued without any variation or intervention. Admittedly, the petitioner, being the wife, is the legal heir and successor to her 4 TMDJ w 237t2 2025 husband and to the properties/benefits left behind hirn. In the case of ssrbati Devi (cited supra), the facts are that the i rsured therein has died nominating his wife as the nominee and r s mother and son were left without any benefits. In para No. 1 I of the said case, the Hon'ble Apex Court has observed that the rights rf the heirs of a deceased insurer person are to be ascertained unrr:r the raw of succession applicable to him and that the tegal he rrs rvould be entitled for the benefit. It was also held that a me r.: nomination under Section 39 of the Insurance Act does nor confer any benehcial interest in the amount payable under a I f.e insurance policy upon the nominee upon the death of the insure,l

7. In view of the same and respectfully following t re same, this Court holds that the petitioner is entitled to the t ythu Bhima amount, as she and her children are the legal heirs of lhe deceased. The leamed counsel for the petitioner has drawn th: attention of this Court to the family member certificate which is ..iled at page No.26 of the writ papers, to demonstrate that there rrre no other family members of the deceased farmer. Therefore, lre petitioner and her children are entitled to the Rythu Bhima a r ount to the \ Y a-\ 5 TMDJ w 2J112-2O2s extent of their respective share. The respondents are accordingly directed to make palrrnent.

8. Therefore, the respondents are directed to consider the said family members certificate and disburse the amount to the petitioner and other legal heirs in the ratio of their entitlement.

9. With the above directions, this Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs

10. Miscellaneous applications, if any, pending in this Writ Petition, shall stand closed I //TRUE COPY// $or-e. eorurua A\SSISTANT RE KRISHNA GISTRAR /- SECTION OFFICER To, Hyderabad . 1 lhg ,Prlnqpal Secretary, Agricullure and Marketing Department, Secretariat ^ Burtdtng, Secretariat, The tate of Telangana, Hydeiabad 2. The Commissioner, Agriculture and "Marketing Oepirtment. Telangana, 3 The District Collector, Wanaparthy District, Wanaparthy 4. The District Agriculture Offic6r, W'anarthv District ' 5 The Agriculture Exte1gion 6. Divrsional Hyderabad 7. One CC to SRl. M VENKANNA. Advocate IOPUCI 8. One CC to SMT. K. VIJAY SANTH|, Advotate tOi,UCl 9. Two ccs to GP FoR AGRTCULTURE ,High coirrt for the state of rerangana. '10. Two CCs to GP FOR HOME, High Court for the State of Tetangana. [OUT] 1 1. Two CD Copies Manager,The Life rnsurancd corpoiition cit rncira, ietangana, .O.fficer, Revaliy Mandal, Wanaparthy District . PVL BS a HIGH COURT DATED:2811012025 t I ORDER WP.No.23712 of 2025 ( I ,lE Sl 14r s () u E2 l,l01/ 6i r,t. t c).: DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS ilv'{